A point of contraversy (part 1) - Buying a game used is as bad as pirating?

[sibrenfetter]

Completely agree with what cainx10a said in the
If you disagree, answer this: why buy a used game if you can download it for free? You aren't supporting the developers/publishers with your act of kindness. If its not worth buying new, its not worth buying at all. Save your money and do something else with it instead. And if you liked the game you downloaded? Show your support by buying the developer's next new game. By doing that, you are getting two games worth of content for the price of one new game, yes?

I disagree because:
1. You support other gamers to spent money again on possibly new games
2. Many people pirate games they would otherwise have bought new. Piracy and used games are not the same at all in that way.

 

[WaruTaru]

1) If all you want to do is to play the game, download the free pirated version.
2) If you want to get it for cheap, download the free pirated version.
3) If you want to support the developers/publishers, but it new.

If you disagree, answer this: why buy a used game if you can download it for free? You aren't supporting the developers/publishers with your act of kindness. If its not worth buying new, its not worth buying at all. Save your money and do something else with it instead. And if you liked the game you downloaded? Show your support by buying the developer's next new game. By doing that, you are getting two games worth of content for the price of one new game, yes?

Well, I'd buy a used game because A) It's legal, pirating isn't (that's important to me, one tenet of my basic moral code is don't break the law, no matter how stupid (unless it's supressing human rights, but I won't get into that))

B) I'm supporting a legitimate business, the game retailer, why do people seem to hate giving money to game retailers so much?

C) It's cheaper, I'm shallow, what can I say?

A) Legality issues aside, if I like a certain publisher/developer/game maker, I stand by my basic moral code of putting money into his/her pocket to show my support.

B) Why do people seem to hate giving money to the game developers so much? After all, they made the game. If retailers can get 2x the profit from one copy, why can't the developers do the same thing?

 

[Anah'ya]

Sure, I'll buy the cheaper, pirated version of it. Sounds good?

If you enjoy breaking laws and generally being a criminal. That means: No. Unless, of course, you get arrested afterwards, but sadly enough that doesn't happen.

Sometimes I wish I was a mother. And I wish that child was the age of all these entitled children pirating games. All his friends would pirate things and he would try to follow suit, but he would meet my wrath somewhere down the line and regret he was ever born.

Maybe that would make me feel better.

 

[teebeeohh]

Help me understand this:

The publisher of the game has sold X copies to Retailer Y for price Z. Retailer Y sells the games, and gets a certain amount of those traded back because they didn't like it or whatever. After that, they prop it up in the used games section for resale at a lesser price.

Retailer Y will get a little more money out of the purchase because they don't have to throw out a game. But the amount of X copies sold, and with that the Z Price, isn't changed is it? It's not that with every single purchase a little of that money has to be put into an envelope and sent to the publisher, right? So how does selling used games hurt the publisher like piracy does?

This is not me trolling or whatever, I'm just curious if my train of logic works or not.

because if 1/2X people trade their games in and another 1/2X don't buy new games because they know they can get it cheaper used the publisher only get's money for X copies sold despite the fact that 1,5X people bought the game. Now without used sales they would get 50% more money, with used sales gamestop get's more cash.

Where are you getting that completely random and baseless statistic from? Like, you literally pulled 50% out of your ass. You can't have 50% more of 100%. They made 100% of the money they were gonna make off that game. You're assuming the same number of people who bought the game new would buy it used, which isn't true. In fact it's more accurate to say, if I was going to default to such retarded logic, that they would have made 120% more money without the used sales. But that would imply I don't have even the most basic rudimentary knowledge of how economics work.

i went with the "every used sale/pirated game would be a full sale without used games/piracy"-theory that publishers use. I know it doesn't work that way and yes, the numbers were completely random. i have no idea who stopping used sales would impact sales, i don't have data except the pie chart that showed how gamestop makes huge amounts of money with used games. the only thing i can speculate is that stopping piracy is not going to boost sales, the vast majority of people i know who pirate games either pirate games they wouldn't have bought anyway but wanted to try or own the original but are annoying by DRM.

 

[Xanthious]

Actually the discs will not be in the same condition as when new since every time they are used they will be slightly scratched. Add to that the fact that the data will deteroriate over time it is only fair that used are sold cheaper, just like any other used goods.

I hope you are trying to troll me here.

Used games cannot be sold unless the disc is readable. Once the disc is readable you have the product: The Game. Data. Does. Not. Deteriorate. Data will stay data, unless you are a complete knob-head, install the game, break the disc and then delete the game on your HD.

The only argument you could make is that it is an old game (graphics and technology have moved on), in which case sales knock the price down considerably without having to fall back to "used".

But the issue aren't the old games, the issue in my opinion are new titles (within one year) that get thrown back to the shelves by quick gamers (or bored gamers - or well, the gamers that burn the thing on their own discs and keep them anyway).

Again. I hope you are trolling here. There are only a few things in life that do not lose quality, and data happens to be one of them. If you wish to argue this, take it to PMs. If you wonder why you shouldn't, I work with it everyday.

But used video games often are inferior to new. How many times do you see used video games without a book or original box/box art. Sure, you could argue the data is actually the product but I will not buy a game not in it's original case unless I had already planned on returning it within 7 days after purchase (Thank you Gamestop return policy!). Furthermore, with used games often the disc, while readable, will still have some light scratches on it. So yes, while the data is often safe and secure and identical to a new game, the game as an overall package does often times differ from new to used.

Sure if a game is treated properly by it's original owner it could come back for resale in "like new" condition. However, this could be said with any product sold second hand. If you look hard enough at any used item you can find used products being sold that are almost identical to the new product only with a discounted price. For instance I just bought "used" furniture for my apartment and I doubt it was sat in a half dozen times by the previous owners. It still had tags on it and it was literally in "like new" condition. I still paid about half the price though because it was technically used.

Video games are no different than any other good that is bought and sold. To argue the data is the actual product is akin to claiming the words are the actual product in a book. However, I can promise you that you take a book that while, still readable, has a ripped or missing jacket and possibly some light water damage and even though it will offer the exact same reading experience to the reader it will still be worth considerably less than what a new copy would. Bottom line, used markets exist for every product and games are not special. The demonization of used games sales is nothing more than a smear campaign by greedy publishers.

 

[intheweeds]

Yeah it's a tough call. I agree with you though. I don't think we should feel guilty for trying to get the best deal. This is really going to shake down between the dev's/pubs and retailers and i don't really think there is much we can do about it. It sucks that we have to have crappy DRM, but they are trying their best to stay afloat and i understand that.

I just wish the premium could be levied against the retailer in some way and not the gamer. We didn't make this mess, but it would seem in some cases we will have to clean it up by paying the extra ten bucks.

1) If all you want to do is to play the game, download the free pirated version.
2) If you want to get it for cheap, download the free pirated version.
3) If you want to support the developers/publishers, but it new.

If you disagree, answer this: why buy a used game if you can download it for free? You aren't supporting the developers/publishers with your act of kindness. If its not worth buying new, its not worth buying at all. Save your money and do something else with it instead. And if you liked the game you downloaded? Show your support by buying the developer's next new game. By doing that, you are getting two games worth of content for the price of one new game, yes?

WaruTaru borught up an interesting point that i at first dismissed and then thought about a little more. Its not a perfect solution, but there is something to it. I just can't get behind pirating.
We need to figure out how to stop buying used games. The only other option is to get retailers to pay devs for used sales and I doubt that is going to happen.

I think unfortunately we might have to buy only new games. This means less games for us I know, but whats worse? Idk...

 

[sibrenfetter]

But this whole discussion does not make sense in the first place! If you think reselling games should be stopped or dissuaded, then this should count for any product you buy as well.

 

[Anah'ya]

snip

Do you buy the game for the booklet in there?
Do you buy the game for the unblemished disc?
Do you buy the game for the shiny encasing?
Do you buy the game for any other reason than to have the actual game?

Unless we are talking collectible value, then I have no idea what you are talking about.

The bottom line is that the end product is the game. And the developer has every right to cut a portion from it unless you pay them a little extra.

I'd be perfectly happy with not the game being sold, but a key. A license number. Games are still behind on this, and that's a shame. Instead of the developer/publisher selling you the game, just sell the god damn keys. Have a key? Get the game wherever you want, however you want, as long as the key is there. Buy them used in disc form if you want, but GAME/GameStop has to sell you an extra key which passes the revenue back to the actual creator of the software.

Sadly enough though games are an end-user product, and private entities are much quicker to cheat this system than corporations. Which is why this model works like a charm for software titles outside of the entertainment market (BI tools, OS, Photoshop.. etc)

 

[WaruTaru]

Completely agree with what cainx10a said in the
If you disagree, answer this: why buy a used game if you can download it for free? You aren't supporting the developers/publishers with your act of kindness. If its not worth buying new, its not worth buying at all. Save your money and do something else with it instead. And if you liked the game you downloaded? Show your support by buying the developer's next new game. By doing that, you are getting two games worth of content for the price of one new game, yes?

I disagree because:
1. You support other gamers to spent money again on possibly new games
2. Many people pirate games they would otherwise have bought new. Piracy and used games are not the same at all in that way.

1. Why exactly would I want to support other gamers in the first place? The game that they buy new may or may not be made by the developer that I personally support.

2. Same thing could be said of buying used. Buying used games and piracy is the same thing because both of them reduced the sale of a developer's new game by one copy.

 

[Hijax]

A lot of people say that buying used games have helped them discover great games/developers/genres, and they've then bought more games from that genre/developer/series/whatevs. You know how you can also discover great new games? By pirating them. Now, of course, one is legal, one isn't, but, IMHO, the legality of something should not affect the moral value of it(of course, it being illegal might prevent you from doing it, and i'm not saying the law should = morality, i'm saying that the law != morality).

If you buy a game used, you get a game, and no money reaches the developer/publisher.
If you pirate a game, you get a game, and no money reaches the developer/publisher.

The only difference is that GameStop gets money when you buy used. Which is not a bad thing, but from the publisher/developers' perspective, it's a lost sale.

Also, while it's true that not every used sale is a lost sale for the developers, you know what that is also the case with? Piracy.

And believe me when i say, that if other industries could do something aboutmake money on their second-hand markets, they would.

 

[mirasiel]

Help me understand this:

The publisher of the game has sold X copies to Retailer Y for price Z. Retailer Y sells the games, and gets a certain amount of those traded back because they didn't like it or whatever. After that, they prop it up in the used games section for resale at a lesser price.

Retailer Y will get a little more money out of the purchase because they don't have to throw out a game. But the amount of X copies sold, and with that the Z Price, isn't changed is it? It's not that with every single purchase a little of that money has to be put into an envelope and sent to the publisher, right? So how does selling used games hurt the publisher like piracy does?

This is not me trolling or whatever, I'm just curious if my train of logic works or not.

THIS, THIS , THIS!

Seriously this bizzare idea that Publishers are getting paid on an individual sale-by-sale level boggles my mind.

I don't blame anyone for buying used games. I blame companies like Gamestop for not giving any of the profit from used game sales to the game developers/publishers. If you ask me, they are the ones causing the issues.

Tell me, why should anyshop share their profits that THEY pay for with someone else? To get that used copy of the game they have to buy it from someone who already bought the game...

You go into my local game store with say, Deus ex at the end of this month, you bought it for £40..now your an idiot who trades it away after finishing it the week after and get either £25* credit or about £18* cash for it...the store is still paying you for that copy, either out of their own stock (which they paid for) or cold hard cash...what as the publisher/developer done to earn being paid AGAIN?


*which they then sell for about £35 usually, so a £10 profit, which is about £4 more than they make on new but ofc if there turns out to be anything wrong with the disc/game it becomes a total loss because its not like it can be returned to distrabution as faulty merch.

/edit ofc I'm bias since I sell my old, unplayed games off on E-bay..OH NOES IM AN EVIL THIEF FOR SELLING ON MY OWN GODDAMN PROPERTY.

/double edit, for all the *waaaaghh* pubs/devs dont see any of that profit again, they do...WHEN THE SHOP BUYS THEIR NEXT OVERPRICED PIECE OF SHIT NEW TO SELL....Profitable shops/companies buy more stock you fucksticks.

 

[Vivi22]

THIS. DEAR GOD, THIS.

Once the game is on the store shelves, the devs and pubs have their moolah. The only reason used games piss developers off is because they don't get EVEN MOAR monies unless the distributor sells out and has to buy more. They see money that second hand games places are making and want it. Plain and simple.

Have to agree. And frankly, saying piracy is no different than stealing is saying that you have no right to subsequently sell anything you've legally purchased. Because piracy is stealing. You're getting a game for free. But you're not stealing from Ford if you sell your truck to someone after 3 or 4 years.

Though some game companies already feel that you shouldn't have the right to sell something you paid money for in full.

 

[Floppertje]

they also seem to forget that game sold used, can get them profit from DLC, where as a game that stands on someone's shelf because they're not playing it and not selling it, does not.

 

[GrizzlerBorno]

However does that mean we should be felling deep emotional guilt? I don't think so, we as humans always want the best deal so we always look for a way to save a bit of money; for Steam users its the sales and console users who can.

To summarise, I disagree in part you are paying something for the game and its not your fault that money is being held by the corporate retailers who are doing something as bad as pirating... not giving money to the publishers to make the games.

Here's what I posted to someone else who used that same logic on me just five minutes ago. Forgive me for being lazy but I literally just finished writing this:

Why on earth should I be punished for looking for a good deal when its clearly the game retailer that's at fault? they sell it for cheaper (or slightly cheaper depending on the age of the game)

But...But Pirates get the best deals EVER, then! How can you beat the price of free?!

Or fuck Torrents. If you go to a DVD store in any shopping mall in any Indian city, you can get a bootleg double Dvd copy of ANY retail game for like.....~100 rupees. No DRM. No cut levels. No multiplayer though.... But still 100 rupees. That's literally 2 fucking Dollars! So Indian gamers are getting the best bargain deals of all time! And apparently you can't blame them for doing that?

And technically the gamers themselves aren't stealing cause they are paying some random third party that is not affiliated with any publishers, for their used games. Sound familiar?

It's true. You could say "Oh it's not my fault. I'm just looking for a good deal. It's Gamestop who's the enemy" And I reply "No shut up. It IS your fault. Just because you're paying somebody some money, doesn't absolve you of the fact that you're still not paying publishers to play their games. You're being conned so you're not at fault?

 

[Xanthious]

snip

Do you buy the game for the booklet in there?
Do you buy the game for the unblemished disc?
Do you buy the game for the shiny encasing?
Do you buy the game for any other reason than to have the actual game?

Unless we are talking collectible value, then I have no idea what you are talking about.

The bottom line is that the end product is the game. And the developer has every right to cut a portion from it unless you pay them a little extra.

I'd be perfectly happy with not the game being sold, but a key. A license number. Games are still behind on this, and that's a shame. Instead of the developer/publisher selling you the game, just sell the god damn keys. Have a key? Get the game wherever you want, however you want, as long as the key is there. Buy them used in disc form if you want, but GAME/GameStop has to sell you an extra key which passes the revenue back to the actual creator of the software.

Sadly enough though games are an end-user product, and private entities are much quicker to cheat this system than corporations. Which is why this model works like a charm for software titles outside of the entertainment market (BI tools, OS, Photoshop.. etc)

Do you buy a book for any other reason than the story contained within the pages? So by the same logic you presented above a used book is identical to a new one. Sure the pages may rip over time and the jacket might get lost but the words within will still be the same. Heck an even closer example could be made about used DvDs. The difference between books/DVDs and games is you simply don't hear the book or dvd industry crying like spoiled children about how buying and selling goods has worked for hundreds upon hundred of years.

To you personally the game may just be about the data. However, to some people, the game is an overall package. Some people like having the original case and book. Some people don't care how readable the disc may be they still do not want any scratches on their discs. These are things that do get often lost or ripped or scratched on used games. This does decrease how desirable a game is to a large number of people. Even though it may not change how you feel about the over all product it doesn't change the fact that a game that is just a lightly scratched disc in some generic case with no book or box art is viewed much differently than a new copy by many.

As I said previously this campaign against used games is nothing more than a smear campaign put forth by greedy publishers. They get their money for the game when they sell the new copies to Gamestop or Walmart or whoever buys it from them originally. They are no more entitled to further profits than any other maker and seller of goods is past the initial purchase. Games are not special. Let me repeat that. Games are NOT special. They are a good that is bought and sold, nothing more, and as such deserve to be treated just like every other product that is bought and sold.

 

[mirasiel]

they also seem to forget that game sold used, can get them profit from DLC, where as a game that stands on someone's shelf because they're not playing it and not selling it, does not.

Exactly, buy mass effect 3 pre-owned and well shit, your probably going to blow more money on the various DLC for it because y'know...you bought mass effect 2...your probably a fan and want the whole story.


Maybe some horse armor if you bought oblvion *snrk* did anyone ever buy that?

 

[O maestre]

it basically boils down to, that i want to be able to do whatever i want with my property... FYI i personally never buy used games from retailers only from other people.

it is a simple point to defend compare a game to a car or some other non digital object and you can see how silly this "countermeasure" is.

fact is there is no actual loss of revenue... somebody bought the game did not like it and sold it back or sold it to someone else.. there is no actual loss for the publisher. fact is for there to be used games, there also has to be purchased games. used games are dependent on the fact that somebody else made a purchase which they regretted and are now selling to somebody else because they dont want it anymore.

its not that difficult and has been done with every single product ever created since the dawn of time. like i stated if this where any other product there would be no problem

i had an epiphone les paul guitar, that i did not use at all anymore, so i sold it to someone else... gibson was not hurt buy this at all, because the kid i sold it to would have probably bought a cheaper guitar anyway.

we as consumers need to make it clear to manufacturers that our money means our product, ownership rights cannot be infringed... id absolutely hate being a consumer if every company had the same business model that apple has. this whole approach is disgusting and vile.

 

[Nobby]

This is silly. I look at buying a second hand game like buying second hand books.
When you buy a second hand book you don't expect the author or publisher to come and rip out a few chapters, and this is pretty much what id is doing.

Like several people have said, publishers and developers need to stop bitching about something that is widespread, socially acceptable, bringing gaming to an audience who might otherwise be unable to afford it and which is spreading their brand and growing their potential customer base.

 

[kayisking]

Help me understand this:

The publisher of the game has sold X copies to Retailer Y for price Z. Retailer Y sells the games, and gets a certain amount of those traded back because they didn't like it or whatever. After that, they prop it up in the used games section for resale at a lesser price.

Retailer Y will get a little more money out of the purchase because they don't have to throw out a game. But the amount of X copies sold, and with that the Z Price, isn't changed is it? It's not that with every single purchase a little of that money has to be put into an envelope and sent to the publisher, right? So how does selling used games hurt the publisher like piracy does?

This is not me trolling or whatever, I'm just curious if my train of logic works or not.

Yes but if Y wouldn't sell X multiple times, then X would have to increase, witch would then increase the income for the develepor.

 

[Stu35]

why buy a used game if you can download it for free? You aren't supporting the developers/publishers with your act of kindness.

I'm keeping my local game shop open, I'm helping my nations economy, and I'm not breaking the law.

Theres 3 reasons just off the top of my head to buy a used game over downloading one.

Not to mention that I AM helping the Developers and Publishers, for reasons stated in previous posts.